Developing World to Donor Nations: Measuring Progress Should be “Lean but not Mean”
NEW YORK, May 22 (C-Fam) Wealthy donor nations emphasizing “accountability” were rebuffed by states wary of being pressured into adopting a “one size fits all” development scheme this week in the final round of discussions on how best to track progress on a massive new set of UN development priorities.
The first draft of an agreement on the post-2015 development agenda will be released by the end of May. At the heart of the agreement are 17 goals and 169 targets drafted by the General Assembly last year, which will direct how billions, and possibly trillions, of domestic funds and foreign assistance will be spent in the next 15 years.
To keep track of progress on the goals, some donor countries are keen on a “peer review” style mechanism whereby UN member states, agencies, and non-governmental organizations can criticize, comment on, and make recommendations for individual countries in a UN body called the High Level Political Forum, and other regional mechanisms.
Donor countries have pressured developing countries to allow abortion and promote social acceptance of homosexuality in such UN peer review mechanisms. Non-governmental organizations funded by the same states further echo their views and increase their influence.
UN member states concluded the final round of consultations this week ahead of negotiations on the “zero draft” next month, and expressed their preferences on how the UN system should follow-up and review progress on achieving the new development agenda
At a gathering on Wednesday Ambassador Macharia Kamau, who has been leading negotiations on the new development agenda for three years, told non-governmental organizations who want a larger role in UN intergovernmental processes that they should tone down their rhetoric and understand the challenges and different contexts of developing countries if they want the follow-up and review to work.
“Sometimes when we hear a colleague from civil society we only hear berating and issues of concern,” he suggested a positive approach would be more fruitful.
As often is the case, the discussion in the UN meeting room boiled down to semantics. Donor countries insist on the use of the term “accountability” to describe the process whereby countries will report on, and the UN system as a whole takes stock, of progress on the goals.
Developing countries demanded that everyone stop using the term “accountability” and refer to the process as “follow-up and review” during the consultations. They are adamant that those terms are not helpful because “accountability” only exists on the national political level, and that it could actually lead to an acrimonious review process instead of one characterized by mutual cooperation.
An Indian delegate said the follow-up and review should “avoid the tendency to overprescribe” and that “excessive detail or intensity could deter participation.” He also coined a catchphrase that has since been repeated often. The follow-up and review should be “lean but not mean,” he said.
Kamau appeared disappointed that a more ambitious overhaul of the UN does not appear to be on the table. During discussions on Wednesday he asked “Can 20th century institutions deliver on 21st century agenda?”
He jabbed at a UN system where “change is anathema. “Status quo has an army,” he lamented, “people are afraid that change will impact them individually.”
Another ongoing debate involves tweaks to the already agreed goals and targets.
A Saudi delegate combatively said he was “ready” to re-open target 5.6, which includes the term “reproductive rights,” for negotiation if other countries kept asking for changes to the agreed goals and targets.
View online at: https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/sdgs-developing-world-to-donor-nations-measuring-progress-should-be-lean-but-not-mean/
© 2024 C-Fam (Center for Family & Human Rights).
Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.
www.c-fam.org